I don't know how you can watch Doug Free play all year and think we should pay $9.5mm for one guard.

One great offensive lineman does not change much. The defense will still attack your scrubs. The Giants have been successful with 5 okay guys. Free was just awful and early Mackenzie was worse. We need to fill the big holes. We don't need the 49ers oline to run our offense.

Alberts was the wrong pick. I don't know how anyone can say otherwise.

You're way out in left field on these rookies. I didn't realize Doug Martin wasn't a good starter this year. Neither was Russell Wilson. Alfred Morris. Bobby Wagner, Lavonte David, Michael Brockers, Fletcher Cox, Janoris Jenkins. All guys who might one day be good starters.

Honestly. There isn't an ounce of truth to what you're saying. You're taking a certain situation for a player and claiming it's the norm with everyone.

I see, so "the norm" is 8 players out of the 253 draft picks last year but I'm in left field. When 3 of the players you are listing are the top tier picks that I said would contribute (Jenkins would have been if he wasn't a head case).

If you have a 1st round pick (and I mean any 1st round pick ) and the player does not contribute heavily in year one, barring serious injury, it would be very disappointing.

My point is that Kiper every year picks players to step in as adequate starters from the draft, often guys taken after the 1st round. And it very rarely happens that way, even players taken in the first round will get playing time but not be a solid starter that establishes himself in the position from day one. Guys taken early like Claiborne or Tyron Smith will hold their own but not dominante in their first year. Most of the other draft picks will contribute but not be a lock down starter - yet every year Kiper acts like a team has to take a 3rd round pick to fill a starting spot and invariably that pick gets some playing time but doesn't start.

I do think the most likely draft strategy this year is an OG or C in the first round and that player will start for the Cowboys next year. But in the 3rd round Kiper will make say something like the Cowboys have to take a certain safety or they are idiots - and if the Cowboys do that Safety won't start over Church or Sensebaugh.

Honestly. There isn't an ounce of truth to what you're saying. You're taking a certain situation for a player and claiming it's the norm with everyone.

I think he's gotten turned around trying to make the point that you shouldn't rely on draft picks to address immediate needs because you may pass on better talent in the process and the player might not even be ready to contribute right away leaving the need still open.

Personally I believe players taken in first couple of rounds can indeed address immediate needs, but it's usually better to go with an average free agent to meet the immediate need and let the draft stay true to the available talent.

Those guys got hurt from an accumulation of wear on their bodies, not fluke injuries.

That accumulation is made worse by having to fend off extra OL and other blockers than they would with bigger and more capable bodies protecting them.

That is just not true. They may be worn down or play worse in week 10 because of it but that is not what happened to those players this year. Carter's elbow being bent back on the sideline has nothing to do with the accumulation of wear and tear on other hits.

I think he's gotten turned around trying to make the point that you shouldn't rely on draft picks to address immediate needs because you may pass on better talent in the process and the player might not even be ready to contribute right away leaving the need still open.

Personally I believe players taken in first couple of rounds can indeed address immediate needs, but it's usually better to go with an average free agent to meet the immediate need and let the draft stay true to the available talent.

I would agree with that. But to say something like only top 10 overall picks make any impact the first year is outlandish. Rookies play more now than ever before.

The front seven absolutely was a weakness, but when the secondary screws up it's usually more obvious and a big play.

For a football fool like Jerry, CB became the team's biggest need when Newman melted down in New York. Jones just couldn't see how Jay Ratliff was undersized and worn down and how Spears was and always will be a JAG.

Lee and Carters' injuries are a direct result of the DL being weak. Lack of pressure from the ends is a direct result of zero pressure up the middle giving the QB room to step into throws.

Lack of presence on the defensive front creates a terrible ripple effect.

Average secondary players play a lot better with a great DL in front of them. The reverse is also true, but a lot less often.

To succeed in hte NFL today you need decent players everywhere, and at least one great player up front, in the linebacking corps, and in the secondary.

All things being equal, get help up front first, in the secondary second, and in the linebacking corps third.

Weak in the LB corps you bend but don't break. Weak in the secondary, it's spectacularly bad when you do break. Weak up front, you break every which way all the time.

No, the front seven was NOT the weakness of the Cowboys.

Our pass defense was horrid.

In 2011 we were terrible at defending WR's. In 2012, we improved defending the #1 and #2 WR's, but were terrible at covering TE's. This is all available on the FootballOutsiders.com Web site. Our safeties couldn't tackle either.

There was nothing foolish about trying to upgrade the secondary. I think we may have spent too much on the corners and could have solved the problem with a couple of good safeties and a scheme that doesn't require great cover corners.

We were so bad in the secondary that Carr had to play safety, something he hasn't done since high school. And then we couldn't play press coverage because we couldn't trust the safeties.

It has the potential for a higher grade than a C+ but we have to see if Carter and Murray can stay on the field first. That's why they were there in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. They couldn't stay on the field. Well, they haven't been able to stay healthy in the NFL so far either.

A "C" grade was very kind for the Cowboys 2012 draft as it stands right now.

Time will tell. Hopefully, Wilbur will show something. Claiborne and Crawford were average at best. Hanna showed a little something. Too bad Garrett didn't use him until the season was almost over.

I expect the 2012 class to shine next year, though. If they can stay healthy...

I would say Crawford was average. Claiborne did a great job considering he was a rookie. He had one bad game to my knowledge but didn't see him get beat a lot outside of that. He will only get better and will be worth what we have up for him

Dez Bryant
Sean Lee
Sean Lissemore?
Phil Costa - really played well last year and surprised. Ankle should be okay but still worry about his back.

2011 projected:

Tyron
Bruce Carter
Demarco Murray
Dwayne Harris
Bill Nagy? (starter as a rookie and then was in competition before stupidly being waived injured while Arkin still can't get on the field)?
Kevin Kowalski? (still really like this kid, shame about his ankle, really liked what he showed on the field in 2011)